It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: Gothmog
Most likely the concessions will be bitterly contested and a call for another vote raised around these. But I think it’s very unlikely we will see another referendum. If they thought the majority would vote to leave they wouldn’t have had one in the first place. It’s more likely that the concessions will keep everything in place pretty much as it is in terms of legislation IMO.
originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Gothmog
But , is it going to come down to another Brexit vote even after Brexit was voted for ?
No but it could signal the end for Theresa May as PM.
In his resignation letter, Mr Davis told Mrs May that "the current trend of policy and tactics" was making it "look less and less likely" that the UK would leave the customs union and single market.
He said he was "unpersuaded" that the government's negotiating approach "will not just lead to further demands for concessions" from Brussels.
Mr Davis, who was appointed Brexit Secretary in 2016, said: "The general direction of policy will leave us in at best a weak negotiating position, and possibly an inescapable one."
The resignation and words of David Davis opens the way for Euro skeptic Tory MPs to do something that should have been done long ago .... bring her down.
Brexiteer MP Jacob Rees-Mogg said it would be "very difficult" for Mrs May's plans to win the backing of MPs without Mr Davis. He told BBC 5 Live: "These proposals will have to come to the House of Commons in legislation and the question is 'will they command support from Conservative MPs?' "And I think without David Davis there, without his imprimatur, it will be very difficult for them to get the support of Conservative MPs and therefore the prime minister would be well advised to reconsider them."
I hope they do it sooner rather than later as time is short , we need someone who can stand up the the EU not acquiesce.
originally posted by: ManFromEurope
Problem: all is due at the 29 of march 2019. However the status of transition is. If a smaller part is leaving a larger part without preparations, how can this be worse for the larger part?
In my opinion, the UK wants to go cherry picking. Which really does not fly with the EU.
originally posted by: ForteanOrg
And making unfounded statements like you do is merely that: making unfounded statements. I could just as well (and with more right) say that the EU is a very efficient organisation;
Your cry for 'self-determination' is ridiculous: the nations as we have them today do not honour self-determination either.
Brexit is the best example: roughly half of all Brits voted AGAINST the Brexit, still, their voices are silenced by the simple fact they are part of a nation in which, at one point in time, a slight majority voted in favour of it.
originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Mays government is turning into a bit of a bad joke.
This is like a ticking time bomb, only a matter of time before she is forced out in some way.
The whole Brexit thing is breaking the country, quite literally, its going to break the UK.
Personally I believe we need a second referendum on the final deal but so long as May is in power and a bunch of euro-skeptics sit in the cabinet thats not going to happen.
Whole thing is a mess.
Hard Brexit will kill this country if we pull out of the customs union, we are going to be economically destroyed.
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: ForteanOrg
A majority is a majority no matter which way you look at it.
Please give me examples of EU 'efficiency'.
You know that you've been given numerous examples of EU inefficiencies, lack of transparency, corrupt dealings and accounting, cronyism and undemocratic practices over the years.
What would be your views on a second referendum.